Lga Members Asylum & Refugeetask Group

LGA MEMBERS ASYLUM & REFUGEETASK GROUP

MEETING – 1 NOVEMBER2007

Update on key current

asylum, refugee and

broader migration

issues

1. STRATEGIC STAKEHOLDER GROUPS

Task Group Members have previously asked for further details of Stategic Stakeholder Groups, and how they relate to each other. Attached are brief details of each, together with a relationship map.

The following is a brief update.

Migration Impacts Forum (MIF)

• The Migration Impacts Forum’s second meeting was held on 17thOctober, focussing on community cohesion. The discussion was led by MIF member Rodney Green, Chief Executive of Leicester City Council, and took account of some emerging findings from the Government’s stocktake of the restrictions on work rights of Romanians and Bulgarians.

• Future MIF meetings will be quarterly and will focus on the impacts of migration on specific services. The next meeting will focus on housing.

National Migration Group (NMG)

The first meeting of the National Migration Group was held on 26th September.

There were updates and discussions on the proposed unified border force, the Case Resolution Project, and migration and the economy. Members of the Group also discussed the Terms of Reference, how future Group meetings would be structured (it was decided to mirror the MIF programme of themes), and how actions arising will be dealt with (including referral on to

the Migration Impacts Forum).

The next meeting, on 6thDecember, will consider community cohesion (with feedback from MIF), and housing (in advance of the next MIF meeting).

National Asylum Support Forum (NASF)

The second meeting of the NASF took place on 18thSeptember in central London.

Donna Covey (Chief Executive, Refugee Council) will now co-chair the Forum with Matthew Coats (Strategic Director, Asylum).

A wide range of topics were discussed - Joanne Elliot (Asylum Design and Improvement) gave a presentation on the Role of the Case Owner, Emily Miles (Director, Case Resolution) gave some feedback from the firstmeeting of her subgroup to discuss case resolution, and Nicola Thomas (Director, Asylum Design and Improvement) discussed holding a subgroup workshop on screening issues. An integration workshop was also agreed in principle. The next meeting will be in late November.

2.MIGRATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MAC)

• David Metcalf, professor of industrial relations at the London School of Economics, was appointed Chair of the Migration Advisory Committee with effect from 1st September 2007

• We are currently in the process of appointing the other members of the MAC and hope that the first meeting will be held in November.

• The MAC’s main task in its first year will be to produce shortage occupation lists for the UK and Scotland for Tier 2 of the PBS (skilled workers).

3. CASE RESOLUTIONDIRECTORATE

Work is continuing, focussing on our priorities: cases who may pose a risk to the public, those

who may more easily be removed, those receiving public support, and those who may be

granted leave). As part of this we are looking at older family cases who are receiving asylum support

By December 2007, we will have allocated a case owner to every CRD case. The case owners

will be responsible for all aspects of the case, and will work closely with colleagues from across

the Agency.Once work has started on a case, it will be processed through to conclusion.It is important to stress that this is not an amnesty: every case is beingassessed on its individual merits

in line with the law.

For family cases who have a right to remain in the UK, our overall aspiration is to prevent homelessness. Our hope is that no family granted need move – staying in their current home as a tenant.

To assist this we have made a number of pledges to local authorities:

we will not rush the work – our timeframe for resolving and enforcing action against

families will run until March 2008, with the last actions taken at the beginning of that month.

we will be sensitive to local circumstances -our Regional Directors have been discussing, and as far as possible agreeing, the phasing of our activity with local authorities individually. For those families who have no right to remain in the UK, we know that deportation can be sensitive and will work with local authorities and the police to minimise any risks to public safety.

We will track risks around community cohesion – each Region’s project plan identifies risks and we are working to ensure that we act to mitigate community cohesion impacts.

We will share information “up front” - we have shared (with local authorities) lists of the families we are targeting so that the local authorities can start contingency planning. We will provide regular updates.

No one need move, and there is no need for evictions – we are offering practical assistance, through our relationships with our accommodation providers, to local authorities, to broker arrangements to keep families in their existing accommodation

We will help in finding solutions for all families - should a family have to move, however, or be currently receiving subsistence-only support and seek to do so, we will work with and assist the local authority to find alternative accommodation (if the local authority need our help) to prevent homelessness.

There need be no impact on Council Tax – we will reimburse unavoidable additional transitional costs (principally funding landlords’ incentive scheme payments, and some additional staff time) incurred by the local authority in preventing homelessness, to support our no one need move aspiration.

Reimbursement Package

Following consultation with the local authority associations, details have already been sent to local authority Chief Executives. We continue to work with local authorities, the associations and DCLG on this.

Reimbursement of any landlords incentives will only be paid where there is an existing such scheme in operation, or a local authority has taken or is taking formal steps to introduce a new general such scheme - and to a maximum of the general amounts paid under the scheme. We have advised the following is eligible for consideration for reimbursement:

Rent Deposits – paid for the first twelve-month AST.

Landlord Premium Payments - monies paid out in the first twelve months of the tenancy.

Rent in Advance (where not reimbursed through housing benefit)

Landlord Bond/Guarantee Payments (where there has been any payment made against the Bond/Guarantee in the first twelve months of the tenancy)

Top up rents to cover any gap between a local reference rent and the accommodation element for any existing private sector BIA contracted property where agreement is for a household to remain. This is for a maximum period of 6months from the start of the tenancy.

Top up cost between a local reference rent and a local private sector market rent for any property accessed in the private rented sector to prevent a household becoming homeless where they can no longer remain in their existing BIA contracted unit. This is for a maximum period of 6 months from the start of the tenancy.

We will also consider for reimbursement:

removal costs of up to £100 where the family is moving to a direct tenancy (a minimum of a six month Assured Shorthold Tenancy) in the private rented sector

Unavoidable staff costs associated with this work including overtime, additional staff, secondments, and the use of other organisations - to access alternative private rented property and administer landlord incentive schemes.There is an expectation that staff costs will be covered but these need to be appropriate and proportionate to the number of cases and time limited to the duration of this work (envisaged as no later than 31st March 2008), and should – preferably – be discussed and agreed with the BIA regional lead in advance.

Interpreter costs (but not social services assessment costs).

The BIA is content to receive and consider full details of any claim a local authority may wish to make; but cannot offer a prior commitment to pay all additional costs the local authority believe are necessary. Local authorities have been asked to maintain full records of any expenditure they subsequently wish to reclaim, as these must accompany any claim. It is currently anticipated that interim claims should be received by 30th April 2008, and that those claims will be assessed in May/June 2008. Remaining claims for 2007/08 should be submitted by 30th June 2008. Final claims – for reimbursement of landlord incentive payments made during 2008/09 – should be made by 31st March 2009. As with the Family ILR exercise a local authority association representative will be invited to join the ‘claims assessment panel’.

Further information on the programme may be found on the Agency’s website.

The link is:

4.s4

ASYS is currently showing around 9,500 main applicants on s4 support.Intake currently averages around 180 per week, which is a slight fall from earlier months. The basis of application remains as a relatively even spread across all criteria for support - although applications based on fresh asylum claims account for the largest proportion. Around 60% of the intake is designated Priority A by the representatives (street homeless, or medical issues).

The new caseworkers recruited for the initial caseworking teams and the review teams are now up to speed and turnaround times have reduced. In the last 4 weeks nearly 50% of Priority A cases were decided within 2 days. We will increase the number of letters quality assessed from November.

Transition to target contracts is going as planned and up to 1,500 service users will be relocated from the London area over the next 2 months.

We wrote to members of the National Asylum Stakeholder Forum on 9thOctober, to commence a 4week consultation on the draft Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Services or Facilities) Regulations 2007, which will provide an increased level of support to meet essential non-accommodation related needs for those supported under s4 of the Immigration Asylum Act 1999, for example pregnant women and children. Responses to the consultation are due by 6th November 2007.

5. UASC REFORM PROGRAMME

The UASC Reform Consultation exercise closed on 31 May 2007. 119 responses were received from

a number of sources including – Local Government, Members of the Public, Central Government, Charities and others with an interest in the care of children.

The Government Response to the Consultation will be published towards the end of November. Publication has been delayed to ensure that the proposed reforms are linked to the Government’s Safeguarding Agenda. The paper will concentrate on the following themes:-

Better working arrangements between the Agency and Local Authorities including improved arrangements for age and needs assessment.

Ensuring that those UASC who are identified as victims of trafficking are safeguarded. This will be linked to the Code of Practice that is being introduced in the UK Borders Bill and will spell out how we keep children and young people safe from harm whilst the Agency exercises its functions.

UASC care planning will concentrate on either integration or return to the country of origin.

Greater clarity on eligibility of former UASC to leaving care assistance.

Annexed to the Government Response will be a summary of comments received during the consultation exercise.

6.NO RECOURSE TO PUBLIC FUNDS

BIA met with the Islington National Network No Recourse to Public Funds (NN NRPF) team and the LGA) in September, to discuss:

the work of the Network

gain a better appreciation of the issues facing local authorities

to see at first hand how the Islington Refugee and Asylum Services team provide support migrants who present for services

to talk about Network and BIA objectives to build on the work of last year

to give a sign of our commitment to and interest in the work of the Network

Weare now progressing many of the issues raised. Specifically we are currently working with the

Network to build on the prior achievements, to agree future objectives and to take forward the specific issues (9 key issues) that local authorities, through the Network, are keen to explore

with the Agency. Separately, we are considering a request for funding from the Network to

support current year activities.

In the next week or so we propose to send the Network an update on the issues discussed at the

last meeting, and to meet with them again shortly afterwards.

7.s9

A Written Ministerial Statement was issued on 26 June 2007 by Liam Byrne MP, Minister of State for Border and Immigration, on how we planned to use the section 9 provision in the future. Draft guidance has now been developed on how we will expect Asylum Case Owners to implement the section 9 provision on a selective basis for new asylum cases, under the new end-to-end Asylum Case Owner framework.

Section 9 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 enables the Border and Immigration Agency to withdraw asylum support from unsuccessful asylum seeking families following an assessment that the family is not cooperating with the documentation process or placing itself in a position whereby it can leave the UK voluntarily. The provision is intended to apply to those cases where removal is very difficult to effect without the family’s co-operation in obtaining relevant documentation.

The Government is committed to ensuring that unsuccessful asylum seeking families do not remain in the UK indefinitely. We consider that voluntary returns are by far the more dignified way of making a return for the families concerned. A more personalised Assisted Voluntary Return (AVR) programme was launched by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) on 19 October 2007. All eligible applicants will receive a reintegration package tailored to suit their individual and specific needs in the country of return. This assistance is available for each returnee and to each family member and will typically comprise one of the following: assistance with establishing a business; education; a job placement; or vocational training. An extra baggage allowance will be available for returning families and short-term accommodation needs will be addressed.

The new draft guidance improves on the process implemented at pilot stage in the following ways:

Increased contact management, tailored by the Asylum Case Owner to the specific circumstances of the family

Ongoing risk assessments and case reviews to ensure the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) rights of the family are fully considered throughout the process, with particular attention to any social, educational or medical issues

Key process milestones linked to regular reporting events

Full engagement in a case conference approach involving all key stakeholders, including from NGOs and local authority services, and family members throughout the process

A clear breakdown of the return options that are currently available to the family from the time asylum is claimed, including the ongoing promotion of an AVR together with details of reintegration packages available through the IOM

Full details of the implications of failing to comply with the process

Any decision to withdraw support will be made at Assistant Director level.

We plan to issue the draft guidance in November for consultation. This will be led by Jeremy Oppenheim, Children’s Champion. His team will liaise with regional colleagues, who will organise meetings as required.

1